DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed on 6/12/26. Claims 1, 8, and 15 amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lowe US Patent No. 2019/0286961 cited in previous action in view of Chapet US Patent No. 7, 866, 563.
Re Claim 1, Lowe discloses a fraud prevention device, comprising:
a substrate ( card substrate) comprising a plurality of laminated layers laminated together to form the substrate (P62, defines the substate as layer 830 and the laminating layers 842, 830, 840 and 850) , wherein an outermost laminated layer of the plurality of laminated layer includes one or more surface features comprising perforations or channels (P51, Figs. 5c, the card body may have more than one slit
) , wherein the one or more surface features are filled by an overmold (P51, the encapsulant also fills the slit ) and the overmold configured to encompass the substrate and fill the one or more surface features of the outermost laminated layer (P37, P51, P46-P47
Lowe fails to disclose mechanically interlock the overmod with the outermost laminated layer .
However, Chapet discloses wherein the one or more surface are filled by an overmold to mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost laver (Column 2, lines 49-53, Column 3, lines 41-56, Column 5,lines 16-45; Column 7, lines 1-12).
Given the teachings of Chapet it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lowe such that the overmold mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost laminated laver;
Doing so would increase the mechanical or break strength and the fastening of the layers together.
Re Claim 2, Lowe and Chapet discloses the fraud prevention device of claim 1, and Lowe discloses wherein the outermost laminated layer further includes at least one of a notch and a peg (P51, Figs. 5a, 5b and 5c).
Re Claim 3, Lowe and Chapet discloses the fraud prevention device of claim 1, and Lowe discloses wherein the overmold is attached to the substrate without an adhesive (P41).
Re Claim 4, Lowe and Chapet discloses the fraud prevention device of claim 1, and Lowe discloses wherein the overmold is adhesively attached to the substrate (P55).
Re Claim 5, Lowe and Chapet discloses the fraud prevention device of claim 1, and Lowe discloses wherein the overmold comprises a flexible polymer (P33).
Re Claim 6, Lowe and Chapet discloses the fraud prevention device of claim 1, and Lowe discloses wherein the device comprises a front surface, a back surface, and a perimeter, and wherein the overmold wholly encompass the perimeter of the device, encompasses at least a portion of the front surface, and encompasses at least a portion of the back surface (P49).
Re Claim 7, Lowe and Chapet discloses the fraud prevention device of claim 1, and Lowe discloses further comprising: a chip pocket formed within the substrate; and a chip at least partially positioned with the chip pocket (P44) .
Re Claim 8, Lowe discloses a method of making a card, comprising: providing a substrate comprising a plurality of laminated layers laminated together to form the substrate (P62, defines the substate as layer 830 and the laminating layers 842, 830, 840 and 850) ,;
creating one or more surface features comprising perforations or channels in an outermost laminated layer of the plurality of laminated layers (P51, Figs. 5c, the card body may have more than one slit) wherein the one or more surface features are filled by an overmold (P51, the encapsulant also fills the slit ) and the overmold configured to encompass the substrate and fill the one or more surface features of the outermost laminated layer (P37, P51, P46-P47). flowing the overmold material over the outermost laminated layer and into the one or more surface features ; and solidifying the overmold material P51, P46-P47.
Lowe fails to disclose mechanically interlock the overmod with the outermost laminated layer .
However, Chapet discloses wherein the one or more surface are filled by an overmold to mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost laver (Column 2, lines 49-53, Column 3, lines 41-56, Column 5,lines 16-45; Column 7, lines 1-12).
Given the teachings of Chapet it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lowe such that the overmold mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost laminated laver;
Doing so would increase the mechanical or break strength and the fastening of the layers together.
Re Claim 9, Lowe and Chapet discloses the method of claim 8, and Lowe discloses wherein the solidified overmold material encompasses the one or more perforations or channels (P7, P37,P45 P49, P41 ).
Re Claim 10, Lowe and Chapet discloses the method of claim 8, and Lowe discloses wherein flowing the overmold material comprises an injection molding process (P40).
Re Claim 11, Lowe and Chapet discloses the method of claim 8, and Lowe discloses further comprising: forming a chip pocket using one or more layers of substrate; and positioning a chip at least partially within the chip pocket (P44).
Re Claim 12, Lowe and Chapet discloses the method of claim 8, and Lowe discloses wherein solidifying the overmold material at least partially encompasses the substrate (P49).
Re Claim 13, Lowe and Chapet discloses the method of claim 8, and Lowe discloses further comprising adhering the overmold to the substrate(P41).
Re Claim 14, Lowe and Chapet discloses the method of claim 8, and Lowe discloses wherein the overmold comprises a flexible polymer (P33).
Re Claim 15, Lowe discloses a card, comprising: a substrate comprising a plurality of laminated layers laminated together to form the substrate (P62, defines the substate as layer 830 and the laminating layers 842, 830, 840 and 850) , wherein an outermost laminated layer of the plurality of laminated layer includes one or more surface features comprising perforations or channels (P51, Figs. 5c, the card body may have more than one slit ) , wherein the one or more surface features are filled by an overmold (P51, the encapsulant also fills the slit ) and the overmold configured to encompass the substrate and fill the one or more surface features of the outermost laminated layer (P37, P51, P46-P47)
Lowe fails to disclose mechanically interlock the overmod with the outermost laminated layer .
However, Chapet discloses wherein the one or more surface are filled by an overmold to mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost laver (Column 2, lines 49-53, Column 3, lines 41-56, Column 5,lines 16-45; Column 7, lines 1-12).
Given the teachings of Chapet it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lowe such that the overmold mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost laminated laver;
Doing so would increase the mechanical or break strength and the fastening of the layers together.
Re Claim 16, Lowe and Chapet discloses the card of claim 15, and Lowe discloses further comprising: a front surface; and a back surface, wherein the overmold encompasses at least one of a portion of the front surface or a portion of the back surface (P49).
Re Claim 17, Lowe and Chapet discloses the card of claim 16, and Lowe discloses wherein at least one of the front surface or the back surface includes an exposed portion that is not encompassed by the overmold (P49, also covers at least one entire surface (typically back, but also or instead may be the front) of the card ).
Re Claim 18, Lowe and Chapet discloses the card of claim 17, and Lowe discloses wherein the exposed portion includes at least one selected from the group of account number information, identification information, and a decorative image (P49).
Re Claim 19, Lowe and Chapet discloses the card of claim 15, and Lowe discloses wherein the overmold is at least one of adhesively attached to the substrate or chemically bonded to the substrate (P41).
Re Claim 20, Lowe and Chapet discloses the card of claim 15, and Lowe discloses wherein the overmold comprises a flexible polymer (P33).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Lowe fails to disclose a substrate formed by laminating multiple layers together, where the outermost laminated layer of that pre-formed substrate has surface features that the overmold fills to mechanically interlock with that layer.
The examiner respectfully disagrees . Lowe see P62, discloses Stacking layers 842, 830 and 840 (having a cutout to accommodate chip 832) in the opening, disposing layer 850 (with a cutout to accommodate chip 832) over the opening, and laminating the stacked components together. In another embodiment, only antenna 836 may be present on substrate 830 when the stack of layers 842, 830, 840 and 850 are laminated together, and then a hole for receiving chip 832 is created and chip 832 is inserted. A subsequent lamination step may be performed at a temperature suitable to reflow the meltable layers to encapsulate all but the top contact surface of chip 832. Lowe discloses in P51, Figs. 5c, the card body may have more than one slit ) , wherein the one or more surface features are filled by an overmold (P51, the encapsulant also fills the slit and P1 and 52 discloses slits . Thus Lowe discloses a substrate formed by laminating multiple layers together, where the outermost laminated layer of that pre-formed substrate has surface features that the overmold fills.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to tech mechanically interlock the overmold with the outermost layer is a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Applicant amended the claims with new limitations which necessitated new search and consideration . Therefore, this action is final.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONJI N JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5266. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-9pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Paik can be reached at 5712722404. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
SONJI N. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/SONJI N JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights